GTE Speculation

[Speed-King]

In GT racing every car has a unique feature, in addition to basic regulations, BoP is needed to give everyone an equal starting point, then it's down to the best man wins.

That's not how it works, somebody will always argue that the starting points weren't equal! And if they are manufacturers with considerable involvement the sanctioning body usually agrees with them, only to pee off some one else and suddenly we are again in that old vicious cycle of trying to please everybody.

[AGD]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

That's not how it works, somebody will always argue that the starting points weren't equal! And if they are manufacturers with considerable involvement the sanctioning body usually agrees with them, only to pee off some one else and suddenly we are again in that old vicious cycle of trying to please everybody.

Yes. It seems with GT/GTE that every car starts with it's own rulebook (waivers). The individual rulebooks are subject to change at any time. Then you have BoP on top of that so that the league can either balance or unbalance the competition even further depending on how they feel each week.

I'd rather see more GT classes so that each car can fit into a class where no (or very little) BoP and waivers are needed. The risk in that is that there may be some classes with small car counts, but I think it could work if the classes have distinct and solid cost ranges and rulebooks. I know people want to see variety, but do we really need to see M3s equalized with 458s? What does that prove? How ridiculous the concept of GTE being road relevant is?

[Mt. Lynx]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

That's not how it works, somebody will always argue that the starting points weren't equal! And if they are manufacturers with considerable involvement the sanctioning body usually agrees with them, only to pee off some one else and suddenly we are again in that old vicious cycle of trying to please everybody.

That´s not how it works either. Take GT1 as an example; An equalizing BoP took place at the beginning of the -´10 season, where each car was given their specific restrictor and its specific weight. After that it has only been success ballast (A concept I wish they would abandon. Infact I´d rather see reverse starting fields than that).
I think the problem for the rulemakers is actually development. Teams tend to make dev on their cars, and so a BoP has to made to haul that car back in.
That said, SRO actually had everybody whine about how BoP was unfair to them, so maybe they got it right?

On a personal level, I don´t like to watch rabbit races, where one car wins all the time. That´s why I lost interest in F1 a few years ago. I´m not too keen on spec racing either. I want cool cars, and exciting races, so sportscar racing is what I watch, since it usually provides just that, thanks to BoP.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by Mt. Lynx

That´s not how it works either. Take GT1 as an example; An equalizing BoP took place at the beginning of the -´10 season, where each car was given their specific restrictor and its specific weight. After that it has only been success ballast (A concept I wish they would abandon. Infact I´d rather see reverse starting fields than that).
I think the problem for the rulemakers is actually development. Teams tend to make dev on their cars, and so a BoP has to made to haul that car back in.
That said, SRO actually had everybody whine about how BoP was unfair to them, so maybe they got it right?

That's not how it happened, yes they had those pre-season BoP tests and success ballasts but in addition to those the weight/restrictors were changed and tweaked after every single round of the championship. Why do you think Phoenix and Mad Croc were whining when they got s*itload of extra ballast and restrictors after the opening round? Do you really think FIA got it right when DBR9s were running ~100kg lighter?

Anyways, I've told my opinion about BoP numerous times on this forum, so no need to say it again.

[Mt. Lynx]

Originally Posted by Chiana

That's not how it happened, yes they had those pre-season BoP tests and success ballasts but in addition to those the weight/restrictors were changed and tweaked after every single round of the championship. Why do you think Phoenix and Mad Croc were whining when they got s*itload of extra ballast and restrictors after the opening round? Do you really think FIA got it right when DBR9s were running ~100kg lighter?

Anyways, I've told my opinion about BoP numerous times on this forum, so no need to say it again.

I stand corrected. They haven´t changed the restrictors on the GT1 cars since may this year. http://private.fia.com/web/fia-publi...df?Openelement (Actually info from yourself!) The Vettes and Astons seems to have the same weight. GT3 cars are different matter all together though. No one will argue against the failure of the BoP of the Z06´s. We can only hope they do a better job in the WC.

[Deleted]

Yeah I was talking about the 2010 GT1 BoP, not the '11 (which wasn't that bad actually). Corvette and Aston had the same weight this year but if you remember Silverstone 2010, the specs were as follows:

DBR9: 1150kg (-50kg) and 0kg success ballast = 1150kg
C6.R: 1240kg (+40kg) and max 30kg success ballast = 1270kg

It didn't get much better in the following races

[Mt. Lynx]

I can only agree with you. I always liked the C6.R, and I was surprised that they did so poorly in GT1WC. I know they were leashed a little harshly in 2010, but at the same time I must say I think some of its poor results was simply the drivers being a bit off, especially this season.

This has wandered off topic I must say. Does anyone have solid BoP numbers for the current crop of GTE´s?

[Deleted]

http://www.lemans.org/wpphpFichiers/...djustments.pdf
There (on the second page), however I think some of the values are be a bit outdated now (for example the restrictor of Evora, and Porsche had less weight in ALMS etc)

Now that the factory AMR will be running Vantages next year, I hope ACO doesn't grant that car any more breaks - because it's almost as ridiculous as with the Bimmers

[kyoung]

Pure GT in my opinion should be show room stock cars with no BoP. Probably would be a good idea to have cars that are manufactured in decent numbers, say at least a five hundred to keep cars like the Hennessey Venom, Gumpert Apollo, or an Aquila CR1 from dominating, maybe create a GT Open class for limited production GT cars of this nature.

Pure GT would have to remain original to the road going version except for tires, rollbar, and maybe minimal aero like a wing and splitter. So what you would have is “Cup” versions of the road going car from every manufacturer. You would need strong enforcement by the sanctioning body to keep the cars in line with their road going counterparts. No mid-season upgrades or changes until the new model year. If there is no BoP no one can complain about it; like I have said before I think all major manufacturers think they make a good GT so if that is the case all they have to do is prove it on the track. I would love to see a 458, ZR1, GT-R, and others with top drivers go at it.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by kyoung

Pure GT in my opinion should be show room stock cars with no BoP. Probably would be a good idea to have cars that are manufactured in decent numbers, say at least a five hundred to keep cars like the Hennessey Venom, Gumpert Apollo, or an Aquila CR1 from dominating, maybe create a GT Open class for limited production GT cars of this nature.

Pure GT would have to remain original to the road going version except for tires, rollbar, and maybe minimal aero like a wing and splitter. So what you would have is “Cup” versions of the road going car from every manufacturer. You would need strong enforcement by the sanctioning body to keep the cars in line with their road going counterparts. No mid-season upgrades or changes until the new model year. If there is no BoP no one can complain about it; like I have said before I think all major manufacturers think they make a good GT so if that is the case all they have to do is prove it on the track. I would love to see a 458, ZR1, GT-R, and others with top drivers go at it.

A good road car is - even when supercars are concerned - not necessarily a good race car, simple as that. And from my experience, most sportscar owners care too much about the current racing exploits of their brands. They might like the 'general racing pedigree' Porsche or Ferrari has, but that's usually rooted in the 60s and 70s.

From all the supercar owners I might away from the track, no one was really into current sportscar racing.

So there is in the end limited reason for building the ultimate road going racing car for these manufacturers...

[kyoung]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

A good road car is - even when supercars are concerned - not necessarily a good race car, simple as that. And from my experience, most sportscar owners care too much about the current racing exploits of their brands. They might like the 'general racing pedigree' Porsche or Ferrari has, but that's usually rooted in the 60s and 70s.

From all the supercar owners I might away from the track, no one was really into current sportscar racing.

So there is in the end limited reason for building the ultimate road going racing car for these manufacturers...

You’re talking about cars with 200 mph capability, carbon brakes, and sophisticated suspensions so there is no problem going and stopping. What’s wrong with racing what you sell, at least its real racing not some BoP crap where a one legged man outruns an Olympic sprinter because his shoes were tied together. These teams/manufacturers spend all this money on creating fast cars just to be neutered in the end anyway, what’s the point? The fact that the cars were developed for the street is a plus in my opinion because that would be a real track to street tech transfer, and vice versa.

[Speed-King]

What’s wrong with racing what you sell

That's what Ferrari Challenge is for. A class with no race prep except safety features would probably look a LOT like Ferrari Challenge, due to the superior nature of the mid engined layout....

[TF110]

Road cars are too heavy. They need a race variant IMO. But they should be a certain 'spec' like said earlier. 600hp, 1200kg, wing diameter and such set by regs then have at it.

[kyoung]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

That's what Ferrari Challenge is for. A class with no race prep except safety features would probably look a LOT like Ferrari Challenge, due to the superior nature of the mid engined layout....

No, it wouldn’t, that’s a spec class running one manufacturer. I’m talking about cars from different manufacturers with no BoP that would include front, rear, and mid engine configurations.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by kyoung

No, it wouldn’t, that’s a spec class running one manufacturer. I’m talking about cars from different manufacturers with no BoP that would include front, rear, and mid engine configurations.

No, quite surely one chassis would dominate, and from some comments I've heard about what GTE would look like without waivers and BoP, it would probably be the Ferrari.

Without some kind of equalization process between the different concepts everybody will gravitate towards one concept, and with only a limited number of mid-engined sportscar being available (especially when you introduce minimum production numbers), pretty much everybody and their dog would be racing Ferraris.

It's the same thing in prototypes: While there have been front-engined prototypes (Mustang, Panoz), they have inherent disadvantages over mid-engined ones and consequently nobody uses them anymore.

And for all the sh*t Grand Am gets around here, they never had a BoP between chassis-manufacturers, only for engine suppliers. The consequence: Everybody runs a Riley. Same in F3 with the Dallaras. Porsches in VLN before they brought in the GT3s...

Open competition results in little to no variety.

[kyoung]

Originally Posted by TF110

Road cars are too heavy. They need a race variant IMO. But they should be a certain 'spec' like said earlier. 600hp, 1200kg, wing diameter and such set by regs then have at it.

They don’t need a “race “variant, they are already capable and would be more affordable for anyone to buy and race with a few modest modifications to meet safety requirements. No spec, no BoP, let the teams race what the manufacturers have already provided. It’s funny; you’re already trying to BoP my imaginary race series.

[kyoung]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

No, quite surely one chassis would dominate, and from some comments I've heard about what GTE would look like without waivers and BoP, it would probably be the Ferrari.

Without some kind of equalization process between the different concepts everybody will gravitate towards one concept, and with only a limited number of mid-engined sportscar being available (especially when you introduce minimum production numbers), pretty much everybody and their dog would be racing Ferraris.

That’s just your opinion, and even if it were the case then manufacturers would have to get off their hands do something about it; or not. I think a Turbo Porsche, LFA or ZR1 would represent itself pretty well against a 458. Plus not everyone can afford a Ferrari, but they could possibly afford a GT-R.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by kyoung

That’s just your opinion, and even if it were the case then manufacturers would have to get off their hands do something about it; or not.

Rather 'or not'. Even manufacturers that sell cars on their racing pedigree do it usually on past glory not on current achievements. There is little to now incentive to come up with homologation specials and if they did, that would kill the series in no time, cf. 1998 FIA GT1.

I think a Turbo Porsche, LFA or ZR1 would represent itself pretty well against a 458. Plus not everyone can afford a Ferrari, but they could possibly afford a GT-R.

The cost of the car is just a tiny part of the equation in racing, a lot of the costs are completely irrespective of the actual car you choose to race.

And then, I think the best thing to go by for such a series is - sad as it might be - probably the Top Gear power laps chart, let's see where the cars mentioned by you turn up on that one:

1. Ariel Atom V8 1.15.1
2. McLaren MP4-12C 1.16.2
[...]
16. Ferrari 458 1.19.1
20. Nissan GT-R 1.19.7
25. Corvette ZR1 1.20.4
31. Porsche 911 Turbo Convertible 1.22.2 (I give you 1 second for it being the convertible rather than the Coupe)
37. Lexus LFA 1.22.2 (wet)

So even the closest non-mid-engined car is almost a second off the 458 and that on a relatively short track. Without some kind of equalization that would make for some pretty predictable racing. An if you brought in the McLaren, that one would absolutely destroy all of them!

[alexkiller8]

little OT, someone here really think that top gear time laps are helpfull to understand how much good is a car?
the strangest thing is that the mp4-12c has almost always been slower than 458 in various time attacks, only on top gear has been too much faster...

[Simmi]

Wet laps and differing conditions are not obviously a fair basis for comparison.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by Simmi

Wet laps and differing conditions are not obviously a fair basis for comparison.

Right, but it's good enough to see a trend: the first 24 cars are mid-engined.

[kyoung]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

So even the closest non-mid-engined car is almost a second off the 458 and that on a relatively short track.

What you believe and what is true are sometimes two different things.
Randy Pobst, Mazda Raceway Laguna Seca, same day, same conditions.

Porsche 911 GT3 RS: 1:36.77

Chevrolet Corvette Z06: 1:34.43

Audi R8 GT: 1:36.39

Ferrari 458 Italia: 1:36.22

GT-R: 1:36.35

Lexus LFA: 1:36.39

Ford Mustang Boss 302 Laguna Seca: 1:41.06

Lotus Evora S: 1:42.49

Porsche Cayman R: 1:41.64

BMW 1M: 1:43.31

Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG: 1:38.82

Check the videos out if you have time…

Best Driver's Car

[AGD]

Originally Posted by kyoung

They don’t need a “race “variant, they are already capable and would be more affordable for anyone to buy and race with a few modest modifications to meet safety requirements. No spec, no BoP, let the teams race what the manufacturers have already provided. It’s funny; you’re already trying to BoP my imaginary race series.

Exactly, it's a poisonous mindset. Look, it's not that difficult. Racing got on just fine for decades without this love of BoP. If A) teams/manufacturers take racing seriously and B) they want to win, they will find a way to win. If the 458 is dominating, well, then people like Porsche need to get off their butts and stop playing the marketing game and run a car that is competitive with the 458. Same for BMW and whatever other names you want to throw out there. If teams don't want to compete, fine. When Michael Jordan was dominating the NBA or when Carl Lewis was dominating track & field, guess what, people watched those sports to levels unseen before or after. Domination isn't such a bad thing. I'd rather see that than some "Special Olympics" (no offense to the real Special Olympics who do good work) victory. It's no different than jacking off and thinking that you are evolving the species. I've heard people say that "if you've seen one Dallara Indycar (or insert any other spec car), you've seen every Dallara Indycar" and thus you don't really need to see them again. Well, the same is true with BoP artificial finishes.

If a car cannot truly compete with the established greats because it is a different class of car, guess what, maybe they should be competing in a different racing class as well. Is this a truly difficult concept to grasp? Ok, if you want a BoP racing series or two, fine. Why does every racing series need to be a BoP racing series? And how many of these BoP racing series are actually commercially successful? Not too many. Since it seems some fans are more than willing to blow any road going relevance out the window, why not just run silhouette cars with engine configurations and whatever else where ever teams want to put it? Impostor is impostor no matter how fake something is so why not go for the ultimate in it?

[Speed-King]

Why does every racing series need to be a BoP racing series?

Do you really think people wouldn't have tried a non-BoP-series already if it was indeed that easy? After all, that's what everybody in the comment sections of Autoblog, Jalopnik, Speedhunters, etc. is clamoring for. There would be a HUGE fanbase for this, so the fact that it doesn't exists suggests to me that it is not possible.

[AGD]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

Do you really think people wouldn't have tried a non-BoP-series already if it was indeed that easy? After all, that's what everybody in the comment sections of Autoblog, Jalopnik, Speedhunters, etc. is clamoring for. There would be a HUGE fanbase for this, so the fact that it doesn't exists suggests to me that it is not possible.

Since when have series bosses cared about what fans think? Have you seen the WEC thread? The series bosses are spineless ninnies who cater to a small group of asskissers instead of building a series around people who could very easily become diehard racing fans if the racing was actually a gearhead-oriented sport. Anyway, look at the series that actually do have success. There is the spec nature to NASCAR and before that there was unofficial BoP, but the biggest gaps in performance in NASCAR is between teams and not between models of cars. NASCAR does not BoP the team difference. At least I don't think they do. Who knows what goes on behind the scenes. F1, well, is there BoP there? I could be wrong, but for the most part, I don't think there is. So long story short, a non-BoP series absolutely could be successful IMO. It's only the idiots in charge who think otherwise.